no i am not defending the AV. If someone was "wrong", it was definitely the AV and not the pedestrian.
The AV should definitely have at least tried to stop, it screwed up. Pedestrian has the right of way.
Having said that, I wouldn't want folks on HN to take this as an example and say "hey I am entitled to cross the road without looking, cars would decelerate for me and will always stop for me because i am entitled to right-of-way". WRONG
You cross the road without looking, the car hits you. Sure, AV or human-driver, the car would always be wrong.
You are "right" because you are the pedestrian and have right of way. You win the logical argument, but you are the one spending a year in the hospital.
Do you want to be "right"? Is taking a quick look at the road that much work for you?
The AV should definitely have at least tried to stop, it screwed up. Pedestrian has the right of way.
Having said that, I wouldn't want folks on HN to take this as an example and say "hey I am entitled to cross the road without looking, cars would decelerate for me and will always stop for me because i am entitled to right-of-way". WRONG
You cross the road without looking, the car hits you. Sure, AV or human-driver, the car would always be wrong.
You are "right" because you are the pedestrian and have right of way. You win the logical argument, but you are the one spending a year in the hospital.
Do you want to be "right"? Is taking a quick look at the road that much work for you?